Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
On 09/30/2010 09:36 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: as I've only recently graduated to developer, I've got a question about this. Diego, your request makes perfect sense to me. But, so far I always thought Python, portage, and gcc are the things that I really need to rely on, so whatever I do, I'll keep those stable. (My development machine(s) are also my real-life work machines.) As I do second these concerns, another thought: While /portage/ is vital to our distro (not only) for end users (including devs doing their workwork on Gentoo systems), /repoman/ isn't. So - would it make sense to split repoman into its own ebuild? /haubi/ -- Michael Haubenwallner Gentoo on a different level
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
On 10/04/2010 03:50 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: So - would it make sense to split repoman into its own ebuild? ++ I always did wonder why the two have been part of the same project. Repoman updates could probably be stabilized more quickly with so much worry about impact on users at large. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
Am I the only one who is waiting for a Portage 2.2 unmask on ~arch? It's taking months if not years ;-) -- Fabio Erculiani
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
On 10/04/2010 08:45 AM, Fabio Erculiani wrote: Am I the only one who is waiting for a Portage 2.2 unmask on ~arch? It's taking months if not years ;-) Well, portage-2.1.9.x is essentially the same codebase as portage-2.2. If you look at the 2.1.9 branch, you can see that it diverges and at the following commit: http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=efebcb2ba1ab706b2fd69521a0b0e4d1c28abe9d This commit disables features that I consider to be unstable. Rather than try to answer the question when will all these features will be stable, I'd prefer to ask you which features you'd most like to have stabilized so that we can focus our efforts on getting those specific features stabilized. -- Thanks, Zac
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
On 10/04/2010 12:50 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: On 09/30/2010 09:36 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: as I've only recently graduated to developer, I've got a question about this. Diego, your request makes perfect sense to me. But, so far I always thought Python, portage, and gcc are the things that I really need to rely on, so whatever I do, I'll keep those stable. (My development machine(s) are also my real-life work machines.) As I do second these concerns, another thought: While /portage/ is vital to our distro (not only) for end users (including devs doing their workwork on Gentoo systems), /repoman/ isn't. So - would it make sense to split repoman into its own ebuild? /haubi/ The thing is, parts of repoman are closely coupled to portage internals. So, if we split it out then in practice we'd end up having to do repoman version bumps to correspond with portage version bumps, which would eliminate any practical gain that we'd get from distributing it with a separate ebuild. -- Thanks, Zac
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
Hi, as I've only recently graduated to developer, I've got a question about this. Diego, your request makes perfect sense to me. But, so far I always thought Python, portage, and gcc are the things that I really need to rely on, so whatever I do, I'll keep those stable. (My development machine(s) are also my real-life work machines.) What is the general opinion on this? Do you (developers) all use ~arch portage? How big is the risk? Best, Andreas Am Mittwoch 29 September 2010, 20:58:01 schrieb Diego Elio Pettenò: Hi all, I would like to beg all developers to keep around a copy of latest Portage (2.1.9 or even 2.2) to use for committing to main tree. Reason being that if we add more errors to be reported, using the old stable version will still ignore the error cases, and allow broken ebuilds to pass through without errors. Thank you. -- Andreas K. Huettel dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 09:36:44 +0200 Andreas K. Huettel dilfri...@gentoo.org wrote: How big is the risk? Portage was broken several times but it's always easy to fix. If you're lazy, keep working .tbz2 nearby and unpack it to / whenever necessary. If you're not, you can always run portage from the unpacked sources to reinstall portage. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:36, Andreas K. Huettel dilfri...@gentoo.org wrote: What is the general opinion on this? Do you (developers) all use ~arch portage? How big is the risk? As another dev who generally runs stable (except things that I hack on), another question: is it actually possible, as Diego seems to suggest, to have two portages installed? Cheers, Dirkjan
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
El jue, 30-09-2010 a las 09:41 +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman escribió: On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:36, Andreas K. Huettel dilfri...@gentoo.org wrote: What is the general opinion on this? Do you (developers) all use ~arch portage? How big is the risk? As another dev who generally runs stable (except things that I hack on), another question: is it actually possible, as Diego seems to suggest, to have two portages installed? Cheers, Dirkjan And I would also ask, Where a portage-2.1.9 version will be stabilized? Thanks a lot for the info :-) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
El jue, 30-09-2010 a las 10:09 +0200, Pacho Ramos escribió: And I would also ask, Where a portage-2.1.9 version will be stabilized? Thanks a lot for the info :-) Where - When signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:36:44AM +0200, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: Hi, as I've only recently graduated to developer, I've got a question about this. Diego, your request makes perfect sense to me. But, so far I always thought Python, portage, and gcc are the things that I really need to rely on, so whatever I do, I'll keep those stable. (My development machine(s) are also my real-life work machines.) What is the general opinion on this? Do you (developers) all use ~arch portage? How big is the risk? I use portage-2.2 on all my systems, including production boxes. Best, Andreas -- Alex Alexander | wired Gentoo Linux Developer | Council / Qt / Chromium / more www.linuxized.com pgp47eUOJ1QiL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
On 09/30/2010 01:09 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: And I would also ask, Where a portage-2.1.9 version will be stabilized? Thanks a lot for the info :-) If we don't find any really annoying regressions in portage-2.1.9.12 then that release will be stabilized about 30 days from now. We haven't been finding many regressions lately [1], so there's a reasonable probability of this release being stabilized. [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=335925 -- Thanks, Zac
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
On 09/30/2010 12:41 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: As another dev who generally runs stable (except things that I hack on), another question: is it actually possible, as Diego seems to suggest, to have two portages installed? You can run portage directly from a checkout if you export modified versions of the PATH and PYTHONPATH variables as described here: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/portage/doc/testing.xml -- Thanks, Zac
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
El jue, 30-09-2010 a las 08:19 -0700, Zac Medico escribió: If we don't find any really annoying regressions in portage-2.1.9.12 then that release will be stabilized about 30 days from now. We haven't been finding many regressions lately [1], so there's a reasonable probability of this release being stabilized. [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=335925 OK, thanks :-) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
On 09/30/2010 06:25 PM, Zac Medico wrote: On 09/30/2010 12:41 AM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: As another dev who generally runs stable (except things that I hack on), another question: is it actually possible, as Diego seems to suggest, to have two portages installed? You can run portage directly from a checkout if you export modified versions of the PATH and PYTHONPATH variables as described here: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/portage/doc/testing.xml This could also just be a unpacked release. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Reminder: please use the latest Portage/repoman version to commit to tree
Hi all, I would like to beg all developers to keep around a copy of latest Portage (2.1.9 or even 2.2) to use for committing to main tree. Reason being that if we add more errors to be reported, using the old stable version will still ignore the error cases, and allow broken ebuilds to pass through without errors. Thank you. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — “Flameeyes” http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ If you found a .asc file in this mail and know not what it is, it's a GnuPG digital signature: http://www.gnupg.org/
